Subject: RE: Last of the Connect RIGlet changes

From: Remi Pelland <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 94 17:20:00 PDT

Paul,

Now that you mention it, I remember hearing about that suggestion at the 
meeting.  I don't mind using this approach since we should have a way to 
handle unknown circuit IDs (for this situation and others that may come up).

However, the origin side has to address the received HALT_DL_NOACK message 
accorging to the Data Link ID since the Circuit ID in the message is not 
valid at this point (its still unknown by the target).

Is HALT_DL_NOACK always addressed according to the Data Link ID?  If this is 
the case, it should be specified in the document.

Thanks
Remi Pelland

---

From: Gnanaprakasam Pandian <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 94 14:53:05 PDT

Could we use the ckt ids instead of Data link IDS in CUR_cs.
	/pandian

-- 
G. Pandian           + Gnanaprakasam Pandian      +
Cisco Systems, Inc.  + Software Engineer          +           
1525 O'Brien Drive   + Phone : (415)688-7684      +
Menlo Park,          + FAX   : (415)688-8282      +
CA 94026             + E-mail: [email-masked] +